Johnny South wrote:The 8 team districts are the only part that makes sense to me. But I've been preaching combining districts for several years. You will probably have about as much success with your "one division" as I've had with my "8 team districts".

What would be the necessary steps to promote the idea of moving back to one division/8 teams? I'm curious to know if anything could be done at all.

Yes district championships dont matter anymore because it used to be a battle. It was like playing in a college fball conference. Preseason games and then the real test begins. I guess in a way they matter but youd have to consider if that district championships wouldve been won if theres no split. Making the districts larger makes district mean more when you win it, compared to winning a district championship with a 3 or 4 team district.

Ill assume you just misspoke, or were just referring to your own opinion about "no one cares" .. you just don't believe they mean as much.. which is wrong in its own right as they mean alot and are on just about everybody's team goals to start the season. The split has been good for the smaller D2 schools, who can go in year in and year out and compete for these championships and then in the playoffs. What makes it seem bad is there have been some REALLY really good D2 teams over the last few years at the top of the division. I would argue those are more outliers than the norm

Yes I misspoke on that as district championships do matter. My point is it's not to the extent as it used to be with 3-4 team districts than it was with 8 team districts. But to clarify, yes that's also my opinion.

Johnny South,Yes, I DO want 25 students competing with 104.5 (if that's the way it has to be). I don't need to re-think anything. 6-Man football IS and SHOULD be treated as a separate sport from all of the 11-man schools. Who says that just because you suit up a team, you have to be competitive? There are still life lessons, life-long relationships, and the satisfaction of testing oneself that can be experienced by suiting up six players and competing.

Heck, why don't we just make everyone play 11man and make the 1A's play the 6A's. In life, those may be the hand you are dealt. Face the giants head-on. 6-man isn't real football anyway, right? At least that is what I've heard.

videojoe wrote:Johnny South,Yes, I DO want 25 students competing with 104.5 (if that's the way it has to be). I don't need to re-think anything. Who says that just because you suit up a team, you have to be competitive? There are still life lessons, life-long relationships, and the satisfaction of testing oneself that can be experienced by suiting up six players and competing.

So a team like Lohn who had 18 in high school last year and a team of 6 (5 boys 1 girl) in the same district as Water Valley. Excuse my laughter, because what you would see is more and more small schools opting out of football or you would have scheduling problems if they could not field a team. Then you would have the message board masters complaining about scheduling problems. When I started coaching in 6 man; I was in a 8 team district with Whitharral, Ropes, and Meadow. One of those team sat at home because we only took two to the playoffs. Originally we coaches thought we were going to take 4 to the playoffs when UIL made its change. I've coached in 4 team district where the 3rd place team was 8-2 and sat at home and the district champion was 6-4 and made it to the state game (they played a harder schedule)l People complained when we went from 1 to 2 teams going to the playoffs. With this new alignment rule things could get even hairier. I remember when you would go to the regional track meet and your little track team would compete against the 1A schools ( not a whole lot representation from the six man at the state meet ). Go to a power lifting meet and watch these kids compete against the 2A and 3A kids and watch them to try to earn to a top 12 spot to regionals (all three classifications are in the same division). Then watch them try to earn to spot to the state meet. Even though you might have the top 1A kid. They are put in the same classification as 2A (Oh well, so sorry).

The more playoff games and championships played = more money sent UIL's way. It's not about travel, competition, or equity. Its about the money.

Probably the most logical explanation.

coachj25 wrote:So a team like Lohn who had 18 in high school last year and a team of 6 (5 boys 1 girl) in the same district as Water Valley. Excuse my laughter, because what you would see is more and more small schools opting out of football or you would have scheduling problems if they could not field a team. Then you would have the message board masters complaining about scheduling problems. When I started coaching in 6 man; I was in a 8 team district with Whitharral, Ropes, and Meadow. One of those team sat at home because we only took two to the playoffs. Originally we coaches thought we were going to take 4 to the playoffs when UIL made its change. I've coached in 4 team district where the 3rd place team was 8-2 and sat at home and the district champion was 6-4 and made it to the state game (they played a harder schedule)l People complained when we went from 1 to 2 teams going to the playoffs. With this new alignment rule things could get even hairier. I remember when you would go to the regional track meet and your little track team would compete against the 1A schools ( not a whole lot representation from the six man at the state meet ). Go to a power lifting meet and watch these kids compete against the 2A and 3A kids and watch them to try to earn to a top 12 spot to regionals (all three classifications are in the same division). Then watch them try to earn to spot to the state meet. Even though you might have the top 1A kid. They are put in the same classification as 2A (Oh well, so sorry).

Well Lohn doesn't even have a team this year with 2 divisions, but yes I do think if they were realigned in an 8 team district with water Valley, they should play them. Everyone is getting soft these days. Life ain't easy , so why try and make it easy in football when it teaches life lessons to the kids.

Please explain these life lessons. That the Puritan way of life does not actually work? Working hard means nothing in today's society? Maybe it is the life lesson that that players, parents, and coaches are going to laugh at you because you are not as good as they are, but you should just grin and bare it.

coachj25 wrote:Please explain these life lessons. That the Puritan way of life does not actually work? Working hard means nothing in today's society? Maybe it is the life lesson that that players, parents, and coaches are going to laugh at you because you are not as good as they are, but you should just grin and bare it.

What? Showing up on time( and to practice), working hard,discipline, teamwork, do your job to the best of your abilities. Those are life lessons are they not? You show up late to work, you might not have a job.

coachj25 wrote:OH, you were talking about the life lessons they should learn by just going to school and turning their work in on time.

Yes accountability is a great thing, which football also teaches. You should expect your athletes to strive for the best both academically and athletically. And no, I am proving that football has a correlation with life. It's all about testing yourself through adversity and testing your limits/capabilities. When you face adversity, you learn a lot about yourself and learn how to deal with it in life after high school. I think football teaches you to overcome adversity as a team/individual and if you disagree with me, that's fine with me. This is just my opinion

8 vs. 25/30, that’s a life lesson? Not many military commanders, especially if they have the 8 will take to the battlefield with those odds. You pretty much know how that turns out.David vs. Goliath, God needs to be on your side there. You can pretty much tell who has the larger number of players here. This thread is beginning to sound like two wolves and a sheep discussing what they are going to have for dinner!Just saying.......

FCSA football wrote:8 vs. 25/30, that’s a life lesson? Not many military commanders, especially if they have the 8 will take to the battlefield with those odds. You pretty much know how that turns out.David vs. Goliath, God needs to be on your side there. You can pretty much tell who has the larger number of players here. This thread is beginning to sound like two wolves and a sheep discussing what they are going to have for dinner!Just saying.......

Haha I'm just trying to have a discussion about the division split. Is it wrong to have an opinion? And yes I've mentioned multiple examples of David vs Goliath as it were related to football. Let's go history, what about Sun Tzu, what about the Spartans with 300 men against Persia? Even though they were defeated they put up a fight. What about Alexander the Great? What about Napolean?

Hey man no criticism intended. This is actually one of the better threads in a while. Just my opinions and observations too. Never the less it’s never good to intentionally get slaughtered.“It’s not smart to die for your country, it’s better to make the other bast - - -d die for his”George Patton